Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron

 Main page Article rescue list Articles & content News Awards Members Talk Page 

Welcome to Wikipedia's Article Rescue Squadron, and please join us!

Ready and waiting. Add the {{Rescue}} template to any article at AfD worth saving.

To view articles listed for rescue click here. To add an article to the list, see the instructions

All too often, an article about a notable topic exists in poor form, badly written, unsourced— but should its life be taken at Articles for Deletion? No! Only articles about non-encyclopedic topics should be deleted, not articles that need improvement.

Articles that may be written in poor form, that lack references or need improvement, but whose topics are backed by reliable sources are worthy of existence in Wikipedia, per Wikipedia's notability guidelines. An article being in a poor state is not a sufficient reason for deletion. Some writer may have worked hard on that article. Some reader can use that article. Those writers and readers, if reached out to, can help us preserve worthwhile content in the encyclopedia.

Wikipedia articles are based upon topic notability. Unfortunately, articles are sometimes hastily nominated for deletion and simply need for the topic to be proven as notable and encyclopedic through the provision of available reliable sources on the AfD page for an article. The addition of reliable sources to articles in the form of inline citations to verify content is always an improvement, and also improves Wikipedia as a whole.

Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion– why it's important to read

Wikipedia articles are based upon topic notability. Unfortunately, articles are sometimes hastily nominated for deletion and simply need for the topic to be proven as notable and encyclopedic through the provision of available reliable sources on the AfD page for an article.

Every time an article is deleted, the contributions that were made to it are lost. Wikipedia administrators can access the information in deleted articles, but they are not necessarily experts on the article's topic. Once an article is deleted, its content, value, and appropriateness can no longer be evaluated by the general public.

In addition, the contributor who writes a poor article on a notable topic is likely to be inexperienced. If their first efforts are deleted, they may be discouraged and refrain from creating further articles, or even editing. Everyone starts somewhere, and we should encourage better writing and better articles. Good faith efforts to contribute should be met with encouragement to improve.

This makes Articles for Deletion (AfD) a very important place; one that deserves everyone's attention.

A common axiom is that "AFD is not cleanup". Consider that Wikipedia is a work in progress, and articles should not be deleted because no one has felt like cleaning them up yet. Remember, Wikipedia has no deadline. If there's good, sourceable content in the article, it should be developed and improved, not deleted. The Wikipedia policy of trying to correct problems in articles through editing improvements, expansion and adding reliable sources, which is addressed in detail at WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM, is often more appropriate than a complete deletion of articles.

The question on whether a poor but improvable article ought to be deleted is a major point of contention, and has given rise to the wiki-philosophies immediatism and eventualism. The Article Rescue Squadron was highlighted in a July 2007 Wikipedia Signpost, and has grown with many processes to tag, track, and list tagged articles.

Articles proposed for deletion

Sometimes articles are proposed for deletion (prod, prodded) without being sent to AfD, some of which may actually be notable. Refer to Category: Proposed deletion and Category: All articles proposed for deletion to browse these articles.

What can one person do?

The Article Rescue Squadron is not about arguing on talk pages but instead about editing articles. If everyone who cares about preserving important topics and removing unsuitable content reads one deletion discussion per day (or even one per week), the impact will benefit all our readers. Moreover, reading through an article nominated for deletion and adding sources and rewriting the text to remove or reword unsuitable content will help other editors decide if the article should be kept or deleted.

So ARS wants to keep everything?

No. The Article Rescue Squadron (ARS) is not about casting keep votes or making policy simply to ensure that nothing is deleted. The ARS ensures that articles that can be written to follow Wikipedia policies do not get deleted when they can be rescued through normal editing, which per WP:AFD means that it was not a good candidate for deletion. The {{So fix it}} and {{Solookitup}} templates are sometimes all that's required for a rescue.

Rescue template instructions

What the Rescue template is for:

Our main focus is on articles on notable topics going through Articles for deletion (AfD) that:

• Need references
• Are written poorly
• Lack information readily available
• Need cleaning up.

We also help rescue content in main namespace (refer to Wikipedia: Namespace for more information) and other Daily deletion debates (XfD) processes, such as Miscellany for deletion (MfD) and Templates for discussion (TfD).

ARS members may also be interested in rescuing articles listed at Wikipedia: Listing of possible copyright problems. These articles often cover notable topics. Evaluating the extent of such problems can be difficult, but thoroughly rewriting articles with problems identified as foundational has the additional benefit of helping Wikipedia: WikiProject Copyright Cleanup.

Usage:

If an article has been tagged for deletion (Afd), and you feel it meets the above guidelines, then you can flag an article for rescuing by:

1. clicking edit; and
2. adding the following line of text at the top of the page as shown in the example below:

{{Rescue}}

• The article's name can also be added to the template to direct users to the proper AfD discussion within the rescue banner: {{Rescue|page= }}— by adding the article's name after the equals sign,

If you are the main editor of the article tagged for deletion, or are unsure if an article is a good candidate for the Article Rescue Squadron, then please post a message including the article's title on the Article Rescue Squadron talk page.

As part of this tag's use, please comment at the deletion discussion on why this item should be rescued and how that could happen. Your input should constructively lead the way for other editors to understand how this item can be improved to meet Wikipedia's policies and likely benefits our readers.

You can also add the template {{Afdrescue}} to the deletion discussion, to let other editors know that this item was tagged for rescue. This produces output similar to the following:

• Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. YourUserName (talk) 12:51, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Tag placement example:

You can flag an article for Rescue by editing it to add the bolded text under the AfD tag, but within the two sets of <!-- --> tags, as in the below example using a Robin Sage AfD:

<!-- Please do not remove or change this AfD message until the issue is settled -->

{{AfDM|page=Robin Sage|date=2007 September 11|substed=yes}}

{{Rescue}} (the rescue template goes here, within the AfD template)

<!-- End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point -->

The article will then appear in Category: Articles tagged for deletion and rescue, along with all the others flagged for rescue. Adding it within the two sets of <!-- --> tags also allows the closing admin to automatically remove the tag when closing the AfD.

What the Rescue template is not for:

• Articles that are not in the AfD process, including articles that have been deleted, even if you have archived the content. You might post {{findsourcesnotice}} to the article's talk page as a way to suggest where editors may find sourced material for the article.
• Articles that, no matter what improvements were made, would be considered inappropriate per WP:What Wikipedia is not. Use common sense, and feel free to ask what other editors think on the project talk page.
• Articles that, after reasonable attempts, still cannot be reliably sourced.
• Userpages.

Removing a rescue tag:

It is unhelpful, and possibly disruptive, to remove the rescue tag before a deletion discussion is complete. The XfD process usually takes a week, and the tag is in place for less than that. Let the XfD closer remove it when the XfD tag is removed or the item is deleted. In all cases remain civil, and assume good faith that other editors are working to improve Wikipedia.

Tips to help rescue articles

• Browse Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion periodically, and consider tagging articles that you feel meet notability guidelines.
• Help improve articles flagged for rescue, by adding sources and otherwise cleaning them up.
• In general, discuss issues concerning an individual article on that article's talk page, not on this project's talk page.
• Check Wikipedia:Guide to deletion for tips.

Source searches

• Google News
• Google Book Search
• Google Scholar
• NewsLibrary.com

• FindArticles.com
• World Cat
• Wikipedia Reference Search by the WRS project
• Political Graveyard

• Reliable newspapers

Article Rescue checklist

Here's a quick checklist of 10 steps anyone can take for an article that needs rescue (in no particular order of priority):

1. Add WikiProjects – Look at the article's talk page to see if anyone has added appropriate WikiProject banners to the article. WikiProject banners help draw attention to articles from editors who are interested in the subject. You don't need anyone's permission to add a relevant WikiProject banner to an article talk page.
2. Solicit WikiProject support – Many articles needing rescue merely need attention from an expert on the subject. A short note on a WikiProject talk page seeking expert attention can bring remarkable results fast.
3. Take the time to Strengthen the Lead – The Lead sets the tone for the rest of the article. Take the time to rewrite the lead so that the article title and the contents of the article are in sync. Nothing detracts from an otherwise notable subject, than a lead that doesn't do a good job conveying what the article is about.
4. Find and add sources – It is most important that sources demonstrating the notability of a subject are added when they are found. Do it properly, using the correct citation templates.
5. Wikify the article – If an otherwise notable subject is just a bunch of unorganized content on the page, it is our job to clean it up when we find it and bring into line with our MOS. Turn poorly formatted references into proper citation templates. Add relevant sections.
6. Positively engage the new editor – When you find that the article has been created by a new editor (maybe their first one) or by inexperienced editors, engage them in a positive, mentoring way. Help them learn how to create and contribute better content. Engage them on their talk pages, encourage and challenge them, and most importantly make them feel welcome. If there are policy or guideline issues on the table, don't just refer them to a policy link, engage them in a discussion to ensure they understand what they need to understand. Even if the article is ultimately lost, this positive engagement will help us all turn new contributors into productive editors.
7. Add Infoboxes and Nav Templates – If appropriate and they are not there, add and complete as much as possible the appropriate infobox. Add relevant navigation templates.
8. Eliminate orphaned articles – Link and cross-reference the article with other articles, lists and categories. Make sure the article appears in the appropriate See also sections of related stuff. Look for sources and content in related articles that might enhance the orphaned article.
9. Eliminate the junk – If there is unsourced or irrelevant content, copyvios, OR or other "junk" in the article, eliminate it ruthlessly. If there is a question about the validity of content, start a discussion on the talk page and tag questionable content as necessary. Don't just ignore the "junk" if its there. Conversely, be sure to preserve appropriate content— as long as any of the facts or ideas added to the article would belong in a "finished" article. For more information, please refer to WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM.
10. Treat the article as if it was your best achievement – Make changes to the article that will turn it into an article that you would be proud of personally. We know how to do it, we just need to do it.

Articles currently tagged for rescue

Note: Be sure to purge this page for the most accurate listings. See WP:PURGE for various purging techniques.

• Main page: Category: Articles tagged for deletion and rescue

Articles currently tagged for deletion

• Main page: Category: Articles for deletion

Articles currently proposed for deletion

• Main pages: Category: Proposed deletion and Category: All articles proposed for deletion

• See also: Wikipedia: Articles for deletion/Old/Open AfDs– Articles for deletion discussions that have finished their discussion period and are eligible to be closed following the deletion process.

Miscellany for deletion

• Main pages: Wikipedia: Miscellany for deletion and Category: Miscellaneous pages for deletion

Files for deletion

• Main page: Wikipedia: Files for deletion
  

Files for deletion (FfD) is a listing of images and other media files that are nominated as unneeded in Wikipedia. Files that have been listed at FfD for more than 7 days are eligible for deletion if either a consensus to do so has been reached or no objections to deletion have been raised.

Article alerts

• Main page: Wikipedia: Article alerts

Selected previous rescues

• See a selected list of previous rescues at Wikipedia: Article Rescue Squadron/Hall of Fame

Restoration of articles

Access to deleted articles

List of administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles
Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles‎ (empty) no pages or subcategories

Article restoration

A number of articles have recently been deleted as Biographies that had been flagged for years as unsourced. The admins who deleted them have said they are happy for them to be restored providing any restored articles are then properly sourced and made fully compliant with WP:BLP (Biographies of living persons). These articles that are properly sourced will simply be restored. NB To restoring admins, remove any negative material (it's in the history so it can be readded when sourced) and watchlist the article. If it isn't sourced within 48 hours, please redelete it. Suggest maximum 4 articles per restoration session, please check they were deleted for being unsourced BLPs and don't forget to restore the talkpages as well.

To volunteer to reference one or more of the articles that have recently been deleted as unreferenced BLPs, see ARS BLP volunteers..

How to become a member of Article Rescue Squadron

To join, simply add your name to our membership list; feel free to add your ideas to the project discussion page as well.
Afterward, place this tag on your user page:

• {{User Article Rescue Squadron}}

This user rescues articles for the Article Rescue Squadron.

– There's an automatically-generated list of members using this banner here.

Once you've rescued an article or two, show your Rescue Squadron pride with

• {{User:Jclemens/Rescues|n}}

(where n is the number of articles you've helped rescue)

This user has rescued n articles by improving them in the face of pending deletion.

– There's an automatically-generated list list of members using this banner here.

To invite someone:

To invite someone to join the Article Rescue Squadron, you can use our handy invite by pasting {{Article Rescue Squadron invite}} to their userpage.

Barnstars

There are four specific Rescue Barnstars for anyone who has made significant contributions to rescuing articles; it is up to those awarding them to choose which one to use:

Hall of fame:

• Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron/Hall of Fame#Award

Reasons to avoid article deletion

• It can be discouraging for an editor to have their article deleted, especially for new and first-time contributors.
• Instead of deleting articles altogether, they can be merged with other articles (see Mergism).
• It can be frustrating for a reader to come to Wikipedia for information and inside find that the relevant article existed at one point but has been deleted. This discourages both Wikipedia readership and authorship.
• Deleting a well-written, well-sourced article on the basis of what Wikipedia is not can reduce the total information of Wikipedia.

See also

• Alternative outlets for potentially useful/valuable content which is not appropriate for Wikipedia.
• Deletion policy
• Deletion precedents
• Deletion process
• Deletion review

• Deletion review guide
• Guide to deletion
• Introduction to deletion process
• Wikipedia:Cite4Wiki, a useful tool for referencing articles

Related projects

• Wikipedia:Article Incubator
• WikiProject Abandoned Articles
• WikiProject Deletion

• WikiProject Deletion sorting
• WikiProject Inclusion
• WikiProject Notability

Essays, etc.

• All human knowledge
• Archimedes was deleted
• Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
• Article rescue contest
• Deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia
• Don't be an ostrich
• Don't Destroy

• Give an article a chance
• Inclusionist's Guide To Deletion Debates
• Potential, not just current state
• The Heymann Standard– describes the amount of work needed on a page to convince an editor to change their vote from "delete" or "neutral" to "keep" in an Articles for deletion debate.
• There is no deadline

External links

• The Charms of Wikipedia in NY Review of Books on article rescue by Article Rescue Squadron veteran Nicholson Baker
• Andrew Lih: Unwanted: New articles in Wikipedia
• Deletionpedia
• wmcharts - Deletions and restorations
• The hidden Wikipedia: how to find deleted material about Nutritional Medicine: Orthomolecular Medicine News Service. - Free Online Library
• Kategorie:WikiPedia Deleted – Enzyklopädie PlusPedia (in German)
• Home ("Wikibin The Recycle Bin of Wikipedia!")
• In Defense Of Inclusionism, 24 December 2011